I don't think pbr uses constraints or obeys global-requirements. If it does, I don't think it should. On 20-10-15 10:15:55, Sebastien Boyron wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks Daniel for taking care of this point and contributing to it. > > Daniel already opened some reviews on this subject : > https://review.opendev.org/#/c/758028/ > > This can be tracked using topic "*setuptools-explicit*" ( > https://review.opendev.org/#/q/topic:setuptools-explicit) > > Hervé Beraud made a remark on review 758028: > > ~~~ > The rationale behind these changes LGTM. > > However I've some concerns related to pbr: > > pbr rely on setuptools [1] and still support python2.7 [2] > setuptools 50.3.0 only support python3 [3] > So I wonder if we should also define a version which support python2.7 to > avoid issues on with this context. setuptools dropped the support of python > 2 with 45.0.0 [4] so we could use the version 44.1.1 [5] for this use case. > > [1] https://opendev.org/openstack/pbr/src/branch/master/setup.py#L16 > [2] https://opendev.org/openstack/pbr/src/branch/master/setup.cfg#L25 > [3] https://pypi.org/project/setuptools/50.3.0/ > [4] https://setuptools.readthedocs.io/en/latest/history.html#v45-0-0 > [5] https://pypi.org/project/setuptools/44.1.1/ > ~~~ > > I think it could be worth defining the version or a rule (py2 vs py3) here > before performing a large series of patches. > > Cheers, > > *SEBASTIEN BOYRON* > Red Hat > > On Mon, Oct 5, 2020 at 10:31 AM Daniel Bengtsson <dbengt at redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Le 02/10/2020 à 15:40, Sebastien Boyron a écrit : > > > I am opening the discussion and pointing to this right now, but I think > > > we should wait for the Wallaby release before doing anything on that > > > point to insert this modification > > > into the regular development cycle. On a release point of view all the > > > changes related to this proposal will be released through the classic > > > release process > > > and they will be landed with other projects changes, in other words it > > > will not require a range of specific releases for projects. > > It's a good idea. I agree explicit is better than implicit. I'm > > interesting to help on this subject. > > > > -- Matthew Thode -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 833 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20201015/3b002993/attachment.sig>